What's new
The Front Row Forums

Register a free account today to become a member of the world's largest Rugby League discussion forum! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Game Future NRL Stadiums part II

taipan

Referee
Messages
22,500
17,500? The game knows no limits to its ambitions lol.
It should be a condition of license that you play in a min 25k capacity stadium. When you have extra capacity you can do things like Eels are now doing with free kids memberships.

Of course the Reds averaged more than that when they were the new kids on the block and thus attracted huge crowds.Keep it humble.
The question is ,does 17.5K (and I believe it should be 20K seated) look better in a sold out modern stadium, than 17.5K in a 30K stadium.
Whilst ever we have live games against the gate for a sport made for TV ,crowds /stadiums are always going to be an issue.
 

magpie_man

Juniors
Messages
1,973
These stadiums aren't for the big match ups that would draw attendances over 20k, a good example is easter monday, you wouldn't schedule parra vs tigers at liverpool stadium, it would be at bankwest.
Gold Coast vs Bulldogs, Warriors vs Tigers, basically low attendance games would be a Liverpool game, blockbuster match ups at Bankwest/Homebush, keeping the illusion of packed house on tv

Bingo. The game is essentially a television product now and is only going to move further in that direction with more longue room-friendly scheduling.
Crowds are more-or-less tinsel to enhance the experience for the stay-at-home viewer and stimulate the commentary.
A small, packed stadium creates an infinitely better atmosphere than a mid-sized one that is half-full.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,520
Bingo. The game is essentially a television product now and is only going to move further in that direction with more longue room-friendly scheduling.
Crowds are more-or-less tinsel to enhance the experience for the stay-at-home viewer and stimulate the commentary.
A small, packed stadium creates an infinitely better atmosphere than a mid-sized one that is half-full.

That’s just a self fulfilling prophecy! Not to mention stadiums should be built for the next 30-40 years of growth, not where we are at today. As the number one sport in its markets there is no reason nrl games couldn’t be drawing 25k crowds regularly with some effort put in.
 

taipan

Referee
Messages
22,500
That’s just a self fulfilling prophecy! Not to mention stadiums should be built for the next 30-40 years of growth, not where we are at today. As the number one sport in its markets there is no reason nrl games couldn’t be drawing 25k crowds regularly with some effort put in.

Broncos crowds in a city of 2.3m should be drawing at least 40k fortnightly ,in league heartland.They don't.
Whilst ever we have Tv against the gate, it ain't going to happen.Fumbleball is a different proposition, because it doesn't translate easily to TV and in AFL heartlands it's in bred from the moment they are dropped on their noggin at birth.They know no other sport, because everyone from the media to the police treat them with kid gloves.
 

Suitman

Post Whore
Messages
55,893
Broncos crowds in a city of 2.3m should be drawing at least 40k fortnightly ,in league heartland.They don't.
Whilst ever we have Tv against the gate, it ain't going to happen.Fumbleball is a different proposition, because it doesn't translate easily to TV and in AFL heartlands it's in bred from the moment they are dropped on their noggin at birth.They know no other sport, because everyone from the media to the police treat them with kid gloves.

Brilliant.
And, that's exactly how it is.

Yes, sure, we could do better to increase crowds in Sydney and in general for the NRL, but the AFL obsession is a particularly weird phenomenon in a few small states in a small country, and for a sport that no one else in the world gives a f**k about.
 
Last edited:

Hello, I'm The Doctor

First Grade
Messages
9,124
Broncos crowds in a city of 2.3m should be drawing at least 40k fortnightly ,in league heartland.They don't.
Whilst ever we have Tv against the gate, it ain't going to happen.Fumbleball is a different proposition, because it doesn't translate easily to TV and in AFL heartlands it's in bred from the moment they are dropped on their noggin at birth.They know no other sport, because everyone from the media to the police treat them with kid gloves.

Of course Broncos are lazy. If they wan to be the biggest in the NRL, they only need to be better than each Sydney team. Thats a low bar.

Chuck in a second Brisbane team and they will jump straight into action. They would never let themselves become the small team in Brisbane.
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,854
Bingo. The game is essentially a television product now and is only going to move further in that direction with more longue room-friendly scheduling.
Crowds are more-or-less tinsel to enhance the experience for the stay-at-home viewer and stimulate the commentary.
A small, packed stadium creates an infinitely better atmosphere than a mid-sized one that is half-full.

where they film shouldnt matter then.
 

taipan

Referee
Messages
22,500
Of course Broncos are lazy. If they wan to be the biggest in the NRL, they only need to be better than each Sydney team. Thats a low bar.

Chuck in a second Brisbane team and they will jump straight into action. They would never let themselves become the small team in Brisbane.

No, they need to dominate,and I mean dominate Brisbane ,as comparing with Sydney clubs is chalk and cheeses,as they are not one city clubs.
 
Messages
21,880
17500 is fine if the games are scheduled properly.

Dogs/Tigers would play NQ, GC, Melbourne, Canberra, Brisbane and maybe Newcastle at the venue. That’d give it 8- 12 games a year.


But, the plans should include an easy option to upgrade the ground to 25000 down the track.
 

Perth Red

Post Whore
Messages
69,520
Brilliant.
And, that's exactly how it is.

Yes, sure, we could do better to increase crowds in Sydney and in general for the NRL, but the AFL obsession is a particularly weird phenomenon in a few small states in a small country, and for a sport that no one else in the world gives a f**k about.

it’s not just afl though. Pretty much every league that is number one in its market is largely drawing 20k plus crowds regularly. Whilst sadly we are unlikely to ever roll back the influence of tv in sht scheduling for fans there is a stack of things nrl clubs could be doing differently to fill stadiums. For example Of the 18 clubs the only one I know of that offers free kids memberships is eels. Not surprisingly their crowds on the back of this and the new stadium will boom. It becomes catch 22, game day becomes a buzz with full modern stadiums and that generates bigger crowds and so on, broncos are a classic example of lazy rl club who do little to fill their stadium with fans,
 

taipan

Referee
Messages
22,500
Crowds of 20K average, where a code is no 1 in the market, applies to countries and states where the population is large and the others codes' opposition is minimal.
You have a big city population where you dominate, if you can't crack 20K where you have only 1 club ,you have a real problem, even allowing for against the gate.

NSW is unique for starters ,because of the multi code effect in a state of what ,nigh on 8m.These other codes have been in existence since prior 1900 to 1908.
Plus our media b3ends to the whims of all codes, compared to the AFL states.
 

TheRam

Coach
Messages
13,882
Broncos crowds in a city of 2.3m should be drawing at least 40k fortnightly ,in league heartland.They don't.
Whilst ever we have Tv against the gate, it ain't going to happen.Fumbleball is a different proposition, because it doesn't translate easily to TV and in AFL heartlands it's in bred from the moment they are dropped on their noggin at birth.They know no other sport, because everyone from the media to the police treat them with kid gloves.

Brilliant.
And, that's exactly how it is.

Yes, sure, we could do better to increase crowds in Sydney and in general for the NRL, but the AFL obsession is a particularly weird phenomenon in a few small states in a small country, and for a sport that no one else in the world gives a f**k about.

Or the NRL is the worst in promotion and marketing. It hasn't stopped the infighting, jealously and self interest within the game to allow for a clear and direct strategy in any of the key areas that we need to get right to grow the game in, including crowds.

Individual clubs have tried here and there, but now since the guaranteed $13m+ grant to each club, they have basically given up and just give lip service. A perfect example of the lip service within the game is the collective bargaining agreement, where the players all promised to take a hands on approach to promoting the game if they got what they wanted because they considered themselves to be partners not just employees.

Well as always armature hour prevailed and the powers that be never got anything in writing, so a promise is as good as a lie. The players got the loot and the game got fooled again.

The NRL needs to get every stake holder together and demand that they all pitch in and promote each game like its a final. Oh wait, we don't do that well either. So maybe the edict should be promote each game like it is a AFL game. For mine the budget for grass roots development and marketing/promotion of the game are paramount. Each club should be made to spend a large chunk of their non salary cap expenditure on these two areas.

What this figure is I don't know, but a good place to start for the marketing side of things would be whatever the current highest spending club figure is, they should double and then triple it. And whatever the highest spend for grass roots development is, all clubs should be made to spend the same amount. All clubs should be able to show exactly where and what they have spent the money on and over time what progress has been made. You know KPI's.

If a club has not spent the agreed upon money on these two areas, then the ARLC can withhold the unspent amount from the salary cap grant and must spend it for them in the same areas and as a penalty the club loses that amount off of their spend for the following season. That would ensure that each club would make sure that they do the right thing.

Now the most important part of this would be the policing and follow up penalties if they are needed. Without the ARLC's hardline approach to this, nothing would change. They need to make sure that for example that each and every club employ a minimum amount of development officers. Clubs fund X amount of junior clubs. What type of promotions are they financing each game week? Are they allowing their players to speak their minds and rattle the cages of their upcoming opponents? Are they combining promos with other clubs for better bang for their buck type of stuff? etc.

What are the results week to week, month to month, season to season? Where were the best results seen and can they be repeated for every club? Within a season or three they will have a predictive database that will only get better and better and stronger. Over time it will be embedded in all clubs how growing the game is essential and vital to their very existence other then what is currently mostly lip service and a good idea that they sort of do.

Each club needs to be accountable, but also helped where needed. No club can just flog it off and plead that they have no juniors or whatever other lame excuse that they may argue. As an example the Roosters must be made to spend the same amount in developing catchment areas of their choice at the same monetary level as the other development clubs. I am not talking about putting the money into a few elite players. I am referring to funding and developing junior and country clubs as a whole. If they don't then the amount is withheld by the ARLC and spent by them on grass roots development in their catchment area.

If we were to ever get this right, I believe over the medium term we would see significant growth in all areas of the game. But like I said, it is all about the policing and follow through. Don't just let the clubs do their own thing or police themselves. We need strong leadership and real consequences. I really hope that besides, the rule changes, expansion club/s and new stadiums V'Landys see this area as being vital to the games future fortunes too. He is the only man to ever run the game besides Ken Arthurson and John Quayle that has the vision, strength and enough nous to take on such an undertaking.

But it won't be easy, the clubs are entrenched in their own arsehole, white ant behaviour that he will need to somehow overcome though hardnosed pragmatic single mindedness. It will need to be a carrot or the stick approach and he will need to wag his golden tongue a hell of a lot, like never before. Lets hope he sees the need to take them on to finally get the good ship NRL off the rocks and into open sea. If he were to ever achieve this he will be his finest and greatest achievement no matter what else he ever goes onto do. There is not tougher assignment in the Australian sporting landscape. The United Nations have it easier.

Oh as for the game being a TV product, yeah sure is, but to blame the crowds on that is folly. I'm old enough to remember when we only televised 1 or 2 live games a week and the crowds were even smaller. Does live TV have a bearing on the crowds? Sure it probably does, but not enough if we got our act together in all the other areas. The AFL had dismal crowds too in the 70's/80's, then they got their sh*t together and look at them now. We need to get this right or nothing significant will ever change other then a slight bump due to better stadiums.

No more excuses.
 

TheRam

Coach
Messages
13,882
Crowds of 20K average, where a code is no 1 in the market, applies to countries and states where the population is large and the others codes' opposition is minimal.
You have a big city population where you dominate, if you can't crack 20K where you have only 1 club ,you have a real problem, even allowing for against the gate.

NSW is unique for starters ,because of the multi code effect in a state of what ,nigh on 8m.These other codes have been in existence since prior 1900 to 1908.
Plus our media b3ends to the whims of all codes, compared to the AFL states.

What do you mean. The number 1 sport in the country averages over 30K crowds. You may have heard of it? They call it AFL.

Lets not kid ourselves, we may not like it, but RL is now the second banana to the biggest sport in the country, AFL. Sure we still dominate in the 2 Eastern States, but that is more a legacy thing that is slowly being eaten away. We have the crowds that we deserve and you would expect to be in line with the second most popular sport.

Only the most popular sport in any country averages 30K+, which they do. As the second most popular sport we average, what around 16-17K? That is about right. Show me another country that the second most popular sport averages more then the 20K+ that some of you expect expect? There maybe, but there wouldn't be many and definitely not anywhere near the 30K+ the number 1 sport in Australia does.

Like I said in my previous post, If we don't change the way we fund and promote the game then nothing will progress significantly and eventually we will start to shrink in market share as our competition only grows stronger.
 
Messages
3,224
What do you mean. The number 1 sport in the country averages over 30K crowds. You may have heard of it? They call it AFL.

Lets not kid ourselves, we may not like it, but RL is now the second banana to the biggest sport in the country, AFL. Sure we still dominate in the 2 Eastern States, but that is more a legacy thing that is slowly being eaten away. We have the crowds that we deserve and you would expect to be in line with the second most popular sport.

Only the most popular sport in any country averages 30K+, which they do. As the second most popular sport we average, what around 16-17K? That is about right. Show me another country that the second most popular sport averages more then the 20K+ that some of you expect expect? There maybe, but there wouldn't be many and definitely not anywhere near the 30K+ the number 1 sport in Australia does.

Like I said in my previous post, If we don't change the way we fund and promote the game then nothing will progress significantly and eventually we will start to shrink in market share as our competition only grows stronger.

A legacy thing ?... lol
slowly being eaten away hahaha ... by who ?
In what way is our market share in NSW the ACT & QLD diminishing ?
The AFL's crowds in these markets have gone nowhere in the last 10 years & significantly backwards for viewers on TV despite onfield success for the Giants & Lions more recently & plenty for the Swans too in that time.
Australia can't be compared to other countries because in other countries their dominant numb 1 sport dominates right across said nation & is 2nd nowhere in that country.
Not here ..
AFL dominates the sthn states
NRL the eastern seaboard & those sports are clear number ones in their traditional homelands & this notion that the NRL is being over run & over taken in its backyard is not backed up by any metric or measure.
 

taipan

Referee
Messages
22,500
What do you mean. The number 1 sport in the country averages over 30K crowds. You may have heard of it? They call it AFL.

Lets not kid ourselves, we may not like it, but RL is now the second banana to the biggest sport in the country, AFL. Sure we still dominate in the 2 Eastern States, but that is more a legacy thing that is slowly being eaten away. We have the crowds that we deserve and you would expect to be in line with the second most popular sport.

Only the most popular sport in any country averages 30K+, which they do. As the second most popular sport we average, what around 16-17K? That is about right. Show me another country that the second most popular sport averages more then the 20K+ that some of you expect expect? There maybe, but there wouldn't be many and definitely not anywhere near the 30K+ the number 1 sport in Australia does.

Like I said in my previous post, If we don't change the way we fund and promote the game then nothing will progress significantly and eventually we will start to shrink in market share as our competition only grows stronger.

My intent was referring to it being No 1in the AFL states.
We were the No 1 banana prior to Super league,the AFL were getting very nervous ,when Tina Turner
promoted our game.
Now we have 25m yobbos battling over 4 football codes, that's what we are up against.
Our averages are helped by Parra,Knights and Broncos,although teh latter should be able to do better.
I will say this,give each Sydney club upgraded stadiums, with more cover and seatings and decent modern toilets, we should be able to up that ante.
I agree our promtion since has been either crap or polished crap or not much better..
 

T-Boon

Coach
Messages
15,854
this notion that the NRL is being over run & over taken in its backyard is not backed up by any metric or measure.

one metric is that the Swans get much bigger crowds than any NRL club in Sydney and bigger than the Broncos actually which is an utter disgrace for RL.
 
Messages
3,224
one metric is that the Swans get much bigger crowds than any NRL club in Sydney and bigger than the Broncos actually which is an utter disgrace for RL.
broncos & swans are about the same & have been for a while , except the broncos are utter shit atm.
& comparing 2 teams in 2 different codes in 2 different cities is pointless.

Swans are on the decline
they only got 23K last saturday & TV ratings are diving

the midgets are borderline irrelevant
 

Latest posts

Top